Why was the question on trust asked with Winston as the subject? It seems to be predicated on the assumption that Winston Peters is less trustworthy than any other politician. I’m not entirely sure that is the case. Winston may be slippery on occasion, but I have never thought him to be that much worse than many other politicians.
Why could it not be “Can you trust Mark Osborne”?
Or why not “Who do you trust more, Winston Peters or Mark Osborne?”
Then we have the bridges issue. “Are the bridge upgrades a bribe?” would seem to be very poorly worded. It seems to me the use of the word “bribe” is pejorative and wrongly predicates the question. I think it would have been better put as “Do you think the planned bridge constructions are designed to influence you to vote for the National Party?”.
Then followed up with, “Will the bridge constructions influence your own vote?”.
I think the only question that was useful was the preferred candidate, which Winston is winning by a big margin. A fact that suggests those polled think the other questions were as idiotic as I think they were.
Most interesting though is why Winston is winning so easily? I can’t put my finger on anything other than Winston’s skills in campaigning combined with Joyce’s ineptness, Key’s over-confidence and Osborne’s ineffectiveness. However I can’t kick the feeling that something else is happening here.
I wonder too if John Key who confidently predicted a walkover for National, still thinks David Farrar’s polling is the best thing since sliced bread.